Name: Wildman
Instructor: Dr. Sharon O’Connor –Petruso
Course: CBSE 7201 T
Fall 2012-Spring 2013
Introduction
Statement of the Problem
Review of Literature
Statement of the Hypothesis
Methods
- Participants /Instruments
-Experimental Design
Threats to Validity
Results
Discussion/implication
References
Under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are held accountable for
students’ achievement regardless of color, race, ethnicity, disability and socio economic
status (Faulkner & Cook, 2006).
. Literacy development is of paramount importance in the elementary grades,
it sets the foundation for all future learning.
Package programs may be easy to deliver, but they may not be the most ideal for
developing literacy skills, they are general and not tailored to the needs of specific
students. No program has the answer to all students literacy needs and not all teachers
have the ability to be flexible in tailoring programs to students’ needs (Costello,2012).
Package programs generally consist of teacher’s manual with key
concepts, students’ textbooks with activities for building mechanics,
grammar and usage skills, workbooks below mastery, at mastery
and above mastery stage.
 It is believed that worksheets are effective in
instructing and assessing learners in literacy skills.
Although worksheets are believed to be effective, there
are others who feel that using worksheets in the
classroom if not monitored or implemented properly
can be counterproductive to literacy development.
Choo, Rotagans, Schmidt, and Yew (2011) found out
that using worksheets to build scaffolding techniques
may not contribute significantly to problem based
learning. This action research project will evaluate
the effectiveness of worksheets as both an
instructional and assessment tool in a third grade
classroom.
Multiple intelligences learning theory, teachers should vary instruction and
assessment strategy because all students do not learn and exhibit learning the
same way (Smith 2002, 2008) Howard Gardner and Multiple intelligences.
Albert Bandura’s social learning theory, students learn by observing and
imitating model in their surrounding (McLeod, 2011).
.
Ausubel’s meaningful verbal learning theory, learners create meaningful
learning from rote learning when they link new knowledge to existing knowledge
in the schema (Hassard, 2003).
Constructivism theory, learners create knowledge for themselves by interacting
with teacher and other learners in a classroom, the teacher’s role is mainly to
assist learner construct their knowledge, Constructivism “Student-centered
Learning vs. Traditionalism (Rogers, 2009).
Graphic organizers help learners to understand task by nurturing active participation,
decrease dependency on rote learning and memorization. (Kirylo & Millet, 2000).
The SIOP model (Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol) framework presents
information in a meaningful way that enhances learning (Eckevarria & Vogt, 2010).
 The Line C model for teaching literacy in context was used by researchers in 2009.
Students’ performance were compared against state wide standards-based test, 67% of
the students scored above proficient in English Language Arts compare with the state
average of 47% above average ( Miller & Veatch, 2010).
Think-Tac- Toe an alternative strategy to worksheets is highly motivational and
integrating in developing literacy skills (Samblis, 2006).
Pros of Worksheets
 Worksheets help students to construct knowledge, assess
students and collect feedback, use as supplemental material
to text books in authentic lessons, and build scaffolds for
some teaching strategies (Demircioglu & Kaymakci, 2011).
 Worksheets are effective in enhancing knowledge
acquisition when learners have prior knowledge of the subject
matter and when they are designed using the open task
format (Harms & Krombab, 2008).
Teacher can create their own worksheets or purchase ready-
made ones. Many sites are available on the web that allow
teachers to create and or make their own. and others
(Eastman, 2006).
Cons of Worksheets
Assigning worksheets as seatwork activities to occupy students’
time while teacher teaches some other students, does not provide on
–the- spot teacher intervention (Pincus, 2005).
Many workbook tasks which are a component of package programs
lack interest, lack rich instructional opportunities, lack plain
objectives, give incorrect feedback and take up valuable teaching
time (Pincus,2005).
Implementing and engaging literacy strategies to 10
third grade students in a public elementary school in
Brooklyn, New York, for forty-five minutes, four times
per week over three months will increase their reading
and writing skills.
Participants
10 third grade African American students, average age
eight years-old.
Instruments
-Pretest
-Worksheet
- Posttest
-Survey
 Pre-Experimental : one treatment group, no control group.
 Non-Randomly Assigned : Researcher will use class
assigned to her because there is no control group.
 Design Pattern :Pretest (O), before treatment
(worksheet)(X), and a Posttest(O).
 Survey
Threats to Validity
Internal Validity
External Validity
 History
 Pretest-Treatment
 Maturation
 Experimenter Effects
 Testing/pretesting
 Reactive Arrangements
Sensitization
 Instrumentation
Pretest/Posttest Results
Pretest
Posttest
Alecia
13
12
Mark
12
14
Peter
5
9
April
7
12
Mary
12
14
Lorrian
9
11
Andrea
13
11
9
6
Lilly
Tatiana
10
13
Kevin
10
7
Pretest and Posttest Scores
14
12
Students ' Scores
Students
10
8
6
Pretest
Posttest
4
2
0
Average
Range
10
10.9
8
8
Students
STUDENTS AVERAGE/
CLASS AVERAGE
11
10.9
10.8
10.7
10.6
10.5
10.4
10.3
10.2
Student Pretest Avg
40 % of the students did higher than
the class average. No outliers
Class Average
Student Posttest Avg
Class Average
70 % of the students did higher than the class average.
No outliers.
Survey Results & Analysis
Correlation Between Interaction
among Students while doing
woksheet and Students' Posttest
Scores
Students ' Posttest Scoes
16
14
12
10
8
y
6
Linear (y)
4
2
0
-2 0
1
2
3
4
Interaction Among Students
5
6
1 Strongly Disagree 2-Disagree 3-Unsure 4- Agree 5- strongly Agree
 -0.671 indicates a strong
negative correlation
between interaction
among students while
doing worksheets and
students’ posttest scores .

Survey Results & Analysis
Correlation Between Teacher and
Students' interaction while doing
Worksheet and Posttest Scores
16
14
Posttest Scores
12
10
8
y
Linear (y)
6
4
2
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Teacher and students' interaction
-
1 Strongly Disagree 2-Disagree 3-Unsure 4 –Agree 5- Strongly Agree
 -0.827 indicates a strong
negative correlation
between teacher and
students’ interaction while
doing worksheet and
students’ posttest scores.
Survey Results & Analysis
Correlation Between Worksheet
Design and Students'Posttest
Scores
Students' Posttset Scores
16
14
12
10
8
Series1
6
Linear (Series1)
4
2
0
0
2
4
6
Worksheet Design
1-Strongly Disagree 2- Disagree 3-Unsure 4- Agree 5-Strongly Agree
 0.035 indicates no
correlation between the
worksheet design and
the students’ Posttest
scores.
Survey Results & Analysis
Histogram and Bell Curve
for Students Pretest
pre
Scores.
2.0
Frequency
1.5
 Mean 10.00
1.0
 Std. 2.6
0.5
 N 10
Mean =10.00
Std. Dev. =2.625
N =10
0.0
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
pre
12.00
14.00
Survey Results & Analysis
 Histogram and Bell Curve
post
for students Posttest
Scores.
2.0

Frequency
1.5
1.0
 Mean 10.9
 Std. 2.6
0.5
Mean =10.90
Std. Dev. =2.767
N =10
0.0
5.00
7.50
10.00
post
12.50
15.00
 N 10
No statistical relationship between the students’
achievement and the worksheet design.
there is a strong negative coloration between interaction between
teacher and students and interaction among students and the
posttest scores.
Implication
More research need to be done using a larger sample size.
 The worksheet d design should be more problem based.
Amendum, S. J., Yongme, L., Hall, L., Fitzgerald, J., Creamer, K., Head-Reaves, D. M..,
& Hollingsworth, H. L. (2009). Which reading lesson instruction characteristics
matter for early reading achievement. Reading Psychology, 30, 119-147. dio:
10.1080/02702710802273
Casbergue, R. M. (2011). Assessment in instruction in early childhood education:
early literacy as a microcosm of shifting perspective. Journal of Education,
190(1/2), 13-20. Retrieved from http://www.bu.edu/journalofeducation/
Castillo, D. A. R. (2012). The impact of a school’s literacy program on a primary
classroom. Canadian Journal of education, 35(1), 69-81. Retrieved from
http://www.csse.ca
Chen, E., DeBarger, A., Means, B., Padilla, C. (2011). Teachers' ability to use data to
inform instruction: challenges and supports. U.S. Department of Education Office
of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development. Retrieved from
www2.ed.gov/rschstat/.../data-to-inform-instruction/report.docShare
Chomsky-Higgins, P., Kanfer, J., Lipson, M. (2011). Diagnosis: the missing ingredient
in RTI assessment. Reading Teacher, 65. doi: 10.10002/TRTR.01031
Choo, S. Y., Rotgans, J. I., Yew, E. J., Schmidt, K. G. (2011). Effect of worksheet
scaffolding on students learning in problem-based learning. Advances in Health
Science Education, 16, 518-528. doi: 011-9288-1
Demircioglu, I. H., & Kaymakci, S. (2011). Evaluation of history teachers’ perception
about worksheets. Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 9(1), 197-200.
Retrieve from http://www.tebd.gazi.edu.tr
DeVries, B. A. (2012). Vocabulary assessment as predictor of literacy skills. New
England Reading Association Newsletter, 3(2), 4-9. Retrieved from
http://www.nereading.org /nera.php?id=1
Eastment, D. (2006). Worksheets. English Language Teachers Journal, 60, 397-398
doi: 10.1093/elt/ccl035
Echevarria, J., & Vogt. M. E. (2010). Using the SIOP model to improve literacy for
English learners. New England reading association journal, 46(1), 8-15. Retrieved
from http://www.nereading.org/nera.php?id=1
Edwards, P. A., Mokhtari, K., & Rosemary. C. A. (2007). Making instructional decisions
based on data: what, how, and why. The Reading Teacher, 61, 354-359. doi
10.1598/RT.61.4.10
Faulkner, S. A., & Cook, C. M. (2006). Testing vs. teaching: the perceived impact of
assessment demands on middle grades instructional practices. Reading in Middle
Level Education Online, 2(7), 1-13. Retrieved from http://www.nmsa.org
Fowler, E. A., Irwin, R. J., Moore, L. D., & Tornatore, A. L (2012). Expanding on
early literacy. Children and Libraries: the journal of the association for library
serviceto children, 10(2). Retrieved from http://www.ala.org.ezproxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu:2048/Content/NavigationMenu/ALSC/ALSC.htm
Harms, U., Krombab, A. (2008). Acquiring knowledge about biodiversity in museum-are
worksheet effective? Journal of Biological Education (Society of Biology), 42(4),
157-163. Retrieved from http://www.societyofbiology.org/abouts
Hassard, J. (2003). Backup of meaningful learning model. Retriveved from
http://www.csudh.edu/dearhabermas/advorgbk02.htm
Hurry, J., & Parker, M. (2007). Teachers’ use of questioning and modeling
comprehension skills in primary classrooms. Educational Review, 59, 299-314
doi: 10.1080/00131910701427298
Kaymaki, S. (2012). A review of studies on worksheets in turkey. US-China Review A,
1a, 57-64. Retrieved from http://davidpublishing.org
Kirylo, J. D., & Millet, C. (2000). Graphic organizers: an integral component to facilitate
comprehension during basal reading instruction. Reading Improvement, 37(4),
179-186. Retrieve from http:/www.projectinnovation.biz/index.html
Lavender, P. 2000). We need to derive reading and writing materials from the real world.
Adult Learning, 12(2). Retrieved from http://www.niace.org.uk.ezproxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu:2048/Publications/Periodicals/AdultsLearning/Default.
Lipscomb, L., Swanson, J., West, A. (2004). Scaffolding. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging
perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from
projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Scaffolding
Mcgee, M.. L., Ukrainetz, A. T. (2009). Using scaffolding to teach phonemic
awareness in preschool and kindergarten. The reading Teacher, 62. 599-603
doi: 10.1598?RT.62.7.6
McLeod, S. A. (2011). Albert bandura social learning theory. Retrieved from
http://www.simplypsychology.org/bandura.html
Miller, M.., & Veatch, N. (2010). Teaching literacy in context: Choosing and using
instructional strategies. The Reading teacher, 64, 154-65. doi:10.1598/RT.64.31
Pincus, A. R.. H. (2005). What’s a teacher to do? Navigating the Worksheet curriculum.
Reading Teacher, 59, 75-79. dio: 10.1598/rt.59.1.8
Read, S. (2010). A Model for scaffolding writing instruction: IMSCI The reading
Teacher 64, 47-52. doi: 10.1598/RT.64.1.5
Rogers, H. L. (2009). Constructivism “student-centered learning vs. traditionalism.
Retrieved from http://educationinjapan.wordpress.com/of-methodsphilosophies/constructivism-student-centered-learning
Samblis, K. (2006). Think-Tac-Toe, a motivating method of increasing comprehension.
Reading teacher, 59, 691-694. doi: 10.1598/RT.59.7.8
.
Speaker, K. M. (2001). Interactive exhibit theory: hints for implementing learnercentered activities in elementary classrooms. Education, 121(3). Retrieved from
http://www.projectinnovation.biz/index.html
Wren, S. (2003) what does a "balanced approach" to reading instruction mean?
BalancedReading.com. Retrieved from http://www.balancedreading.com/balanced.html
Thank you